Chapter 6
Which World Is Real? The Future of Virtual Reality

Photo by: sellingpix

Someday, every home may have its own Holodeck. If that happens, how will
virtual reality change people's lives?

Most experts think that virtual reality, at least beyond the level shown
in today's video and computer games, will not become widespread any
time soon. Fully immersive VR technology is still expensive and
undependable. Most businesses have not wanted to invest in it. CyberEdge
Information Services, a research and marketing firm that covers the
industry, stated that virtual reality or visual simulations earned $36.2
billion in 2002, up from $22 billion in 2001. That figure seems large, but
it is only a tiny fraction of the amount that the whole computer industry
makes.

A Virtual Future

On the other hand, computers are likely to continue growing in speed and
in power very quickly, and virtual reality technology will probably
improve along with them. Back in 1965, Gordon Moore, a cofounder of Intel
Corporation, now a well-known maker of computer chips, proposed what has
come to be called Moore's Law, which has often been interpreted
to mean that computing power doubles every year or two. In other words, a
computer system that costs $1,000 today will do twice as much, twice as
fast, as a system that sold for that price about a year and a half
ago—or, put another way, a system with the same power as one that
cost $1,000 a year or two ago will cost only $500 today. Amazing as it
seems, several decades of experience have proved Moore's Law to be
true.

It looks likely, then, that by, say, 2015 or 2020, computer systems that
deliver convincing, immersive, reasonably reliable virtual reality will
cost no more than a big-screen television does now. Most businesses and
many homes will have them. Virtual reality entrepreneur John C. Briggs,
for one, predicted in the May 2002 issue of
Futurist
magazine that "in the next 10 to 20 years, VR experiences will be
fully integrated into real life."
35
Looking farther ahead, Ken Pimental and Kevin Teixeira claimed in
the book
Virtual Marketing: Through the New Looking Glass
that "within one hundred years virtual reality could become a
semi-invisible service in society, like telephones, light switches, books,
and television—a tool for communication, work, and pleasure that we
use without thinking about it."
36

Some people paint a rosy picture of what life would be like if virtual
reality were everywhere. In an article in the journal of the Association
for Computing Machinery, multimedia expert Ramesh Jain wrote: "You
might experience your friend's wedding in India, seeing what is
happening, feeling the warm, humid air of the wedding hall, listening to
conversations and the wedding music, and enjoying the taste and aroma of
the food being served. You might experience all that and more while
sitting at home in Montana on a frigid January morning."
37

Boosters of virtual reality believe that it will greatly enhance
education, science, industry, art, and entertainment, as it has already
begun to do. They say it will simplify many tasks and let people express
their creativity in new ways.

Changing the Brain

Others think VR may have much less helpful effects. They point to physical
and mental problems that some people who use the technology have already
experienced. Such problems go far beyond the annoying nausea of simulator
sickness. Makers of flight simulators, for instance, found out decades ago
that pilots who had used such simulators sometimes made mistakes during
actual flying because of differences between the simulated environment and
reality. For one thing, simulators cannot mimic the effects of
acceleration that a pilot feels during flight. When a pilot experiences
these new sensations in the air, confusion results. The problem is
temporary, but because of it, pilots are not allowed to fly until
they have been away from simulators for at least twenty-four hours.

Some other people have also reported readjustment problems after using
virtual reality or doing other intensive work with computers. After
researching on the Internet for some time, for example, reporter Chip
Brown wrote that he

woke one night from a peculiar dream, disturbed . . . by . . . the way
the scenes had changed; they had not unfolded in a horizontal flow, the
movie-like montage of a typical dream presentation, but had scrolled
past, rolling up vertically from bottom to top. And my focus had
shifted, too, as if the inner observer were no longer located behind my
eyes, but had been projected 24 inches forward, out of my body, a
displacement roughly equal to the distance between my desk chair and the
computer monitor. The conclusion was inescapable. I had become a
[computer] mouse. Not even a mouse. A mouse indicator. A cursor.
38

These temporary effects have made some researchers wonder whether
long-term use of virtual reality might cause permanent changes, especially
in children, whose brains are still developing and therefore are more
easily modified than those of adults. A few even think it might change
adults' brains permanently. Psychologist and science writer Richard
DeGrandpre, author of
Digitopia
, warns that steady exposure to virtual reality could alter the way people
perceive the real world: "Conscious reality changes as the software
of everyday life changes, and remains changed thereafter. . . . Chronic
exposure to simulated ideas, moods, and images conditions your
sensibilities . . . for how the real world should look, how fast it should
go, and how you should feel when living in it."
39

Connection or Isolation?

People also argue about the possible social effects of having most
personal interactions occur online, in the virtual or cyberspace world.
Supporters of virtual reality and online communities say that future VR
and computer technology could change the nature of communication, bringing
people around the world closer together.

Even today, some young people who share both physical and virtual
communities use Internet-connected cell phones and related devices to keep
in constant touch. Some writers, such as the late Michael Dertouzos,
professor of computer science at MIT, have thought that most people will
share this kind of constant communication in the future. Howard Rheingold
has pointed out, however, that such interlinking could be used for either
good or harm. It could let massive numbers of people work on projects
together or help each other after a disaster, for instance. On the other
hand, it could help terrorists coordinate their activities so they could
attack many locations at the same time.

A child plays with a virtual playmate who reacts and responds to her
actions. Some psychologists are concerned about VR's effects
on childhood development.

Supporters also say that the opportunity to lead a "second
life" limited only by the imagination can be a great help to people
who have little chance to succeed in their everyday life. For instance,
John C. Briggs writes:

VR-enhanced communications will allow those with restricted mobility,
confined to their homes, to interact more fully and humanly with the
outside world. Because they will use avatars and augmented and assistive
technologies on the Internet, they need not reveal to anyone that they
have a disability. People with learning disabilities will be able to
share their experiences, feelings, and knowledge using communications
assistance and augmentation.
40

People who distrust cyberspace, however, say that withdrawing to an online
environment may become a way of avoiding real-life problems rather than
trying to solve them. These critics also fear that the chance to represent
oneself, and to see others, as beautiful or fantastic avatars could
reinforce prejudices against people whose real bodies are less than
perfect. Furthermore, a few people use cyberspace disguises for harmful
purposes, as when a child molester pretends to be another child or teen in
order to lure a potential victim into a face-to-face meeting.

Internet pioneer Clifford Stoll is one prominent commentator who believes
that cyberspace society is shallow at best. In
Silicon Snake Oil
, originally published in 1995, he wrote, "Electronic communication
is an instantaneous and illusory contact that creates a sense of intimacy
without the emotional investment that leads to close friendships."
41
Too much dependence on this kind of communication, he and others fear,
can isolate people from real relationships with family and close friends.

Computer Addicts

The isolation is worst for the small number of people who have apparently
become addicted to cyberspace gaming. They spend nearly all their time
online, ignoring parents, friends, schoolwork, or jobs. They come to
regard the imaginary world of the games as more important and more
"real" than the world outside. (The problem—or at
least the accusation—of addiction is not limited to computer games
and online communities. It also occurred with live fantasy role-playing
games in the 1970s and 1980s.) A few game addicts have even killed
themselves rather than give up the activity.

Supporters of online games and other forms of virtual reality say that the
cause of the addiction is the addicts' psychological makeup, not
the games themselves. "Computer games bring to the surface the
problems of the individual," says Maresa Hecht Orzack, a clinical
psychologist who teaches at Harvard Medical School. "Many of these
people . . . simply don't want to deal with their everyday
lives."
42
If such people did not become hooked on games, these supporters say, they
probably would be addicted to something else, such as drugs or gambling.
Furthermore, people who favor gaming point out, only a tiny proportion of
gamers let their hobby take over their lives. Rider University psychology
professor John Suler, for one, claims that the media has greatly
exaggerated the reality of Internet addiction.

Suler is one of many experts who feel that the way to keep virtual reality
and cyberspace from causing isolation and addiction is to use them as
supplements to face-to-face contacts, not replacements for them. He
stresses "the importance of bringing together one's online
and offline living."
43
Similarly, Joseph Tecce, associate professor of psychology at Boston
College, writes, "Virtual reality cannot replace a warm smile, a
firm handshake or a reassuring hug. It is essential to connect with
someone in [face-to-face]
conversation and to share good and bad feelings to ward off
loneliness."
44

Reshaping Social Attitudes

Supporters of realistic online games like
The Sims
, which lets players direct the lives of ordinary people in a virtual
city, say that such games can help young people learn that actions have
consequences. If a player does not give the Sim characters a chance to eat
and sleep, for instance, the characters will become sick and even die.
Critics, however, fear that such games could make players think that all
consequences are temporary. Real life does not offer the chance to undo a
serious mistake by creating a new character or starting a new round of
play.

Some writers also say that playing violent, realistic computer games makes
people more likely to be violent in real life. A few teenagers in fact
have said that games like
Grand Theft Auto
inspired them to hurt or

A computer expo visitor views a scene from the game
Doom III
. Debate continues as to whether games like
Doom
inspire real violence.

kill real people. However, defenders of gaming protest that games do not
force people to do anything. The true motivators of violence, they claim,
are individuals' psychological troubles, plus problems in society
that many people would rather not discuss. As
Computer Gaming World
editor Robert Coffey puts it:

It's oddly reassuring to be able to point at something you
don't understand and blame it for something else you don't
understand. Or don't want to devote a whole lot of thought to.
It's a lot easier to hold
Doom
[a violent computer game] responsible for some horror than to figure
out the role parenting, society, and good old-fashioned unexplainable
craziness played.
45

Are Avatars Human?

These existing arguments about virtual reality's effects on
individuals and society are sure to grow more intense if immersive virtual
reality environments become commonplace in the future. In addition,
widespread virtual reality could raise entirely new ethical questions. For
example, it might force people to redefine being human.

In addition to avatars, which stand in for real individuals, artists and
businesspeople have created "people" who exist only in the
virtual world. Probably the first was a character called Max Headroom, who
appeared as part of a British music video program in 1984. Inventor and
futurist Ray Kurzweil believes that by 2030, computer-created avatars and
characters will become so convincing that no one will be able to tell the
difference between real and simulated humans online. Norman I. Badler,
professor of computer and information science at the University of
Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, similarly predicts that in the future
"virtual humans will see with synthetic vision, sense our (and each
other's) movements, know us and our actions, and respond in a
coordinated

Actor Matt Frewer's actions are translated onscreen into
those of his avatar, talk show host Max Headroom. Max was the first
virtual celebrity.

and context-appropriate manner. We will communicate with [them] as we
communicate with [real] people . . . and use them as information sources,
conversational partners, clerks, and complaint departments."
46

If avatars and artificial characters become increasingly convincing and
common, Badler points out, their use will raise "a multitude of
copyright and privacy issues."
47
Would one person be allowed to use the form of another as an avatar
without obtaining permission? Would famous people such as movie stars, who
often sell the right to print images of them, sell the right to use their
images as avatars, too? And what if an avatar that looked like, say, a
real mayor or senator made racial slurs or other remarks that would harm
the reputation of the person
supposedly making them? How would people know whether the real person had
actually said such things? If someone else had put the words into the
avatar's mouth, would this be a criminal act?

Badler believes that ethical issues raised by extremely realistic, complex
avatars, gifted with some form of artificial intelligence, could reach far
deeper than this. If their programming permits them to make independent
decisions, he asks, should they be held responsible for their actions?
Could they be punished if, for instance, they deliberately lied to or
about someone or cheated someone out of money? At what point would they
demand, or deserve, the rights and responsibilities granted to
flesh-and-blood human beings?

Withdrawing from Reality

Some thinkers even believe that, for better or worse, constant to virtual
exposure reality could completely transform human consciousness. Critics
fear that large numbers of people might come to prefer virtual worlds to
the real one. Like the philosopher Plato, they would feel that the
everyday world is an imperfect reflection of an ideal, but, in opposition
to the prisoners in Plato's imaginary cave, they would see the
ideal world as the one shown on the screen and the imperfect world as the
one outside. Why let others see a flawed real body when online
interactions can be delivered through a beautiful, sexy avatar? Why bother
with a boring real life when, in an online world, a person can fly through
the air, have adventures in distant or imaginary lands, and build a house
or even a city in any form he or she wants?

The idea that people might choose to ignore the actual world and withdraw
into virtual reality began to concern writers and thinkers long before VR
technology actually developed. In
Summa Technologiae
, a book of essays about the future published in 1964, Polish
science-fiction writer Stanislaw Lem described
an imaginary machine that he called a Phantomat. According to an essay by
author John Gray, Lem pictured the dangers of permanent immersion in the
Phantomat's virtual reality this way:

The more realistic the virtual world the machine creates, the more
imprisoned we are in our imaginations. As our embodied selves, we
interact with a world we know only in part, and which operates
independently of our desire. In contrast, the virtual worlds we
encounter in the Phantomat are human constructions. Fabricated from our
dreams, they are worlds in which nothing can be hurt or destroyed
because nothing really exists. In short, they are worlds in which
nothing really matters.
48

Richard DeGrandpre, like Lem, believes that once people become used to
virtual worlds, the real world will no longer satisfy them, and they will
withdraw from it. This will happen, he thinks, not only because virtual
reality will be so appealing, but because social, environmental, and other
problems will have made the real world just the opposite. "The
ultimate reason we're apt to be taking flight from material
reality," he writes, "is to escape the expanding
unpleasantness of our inner and outer lives—a melange [mixture] of
boredom, restlessness, . . . anxiety, and depression."
49

Shared Dreams

Other commentators, however, think that the power to share virtual worlds
could be a beautiful thing, raising human consciousness to new heights.
Jaron Lanier, the man who coined the term
virtual reality
, said in a 2002 inteview that shared online gaming already is
"like a technology-enhanced version of shared make-believe. . . .
With language, we trade symbols, but with this we trade something beyond
symbols. We trade experience." He believes

A viewer sits immersed in a totally virtual environment. Whether VR
will make people's lives better or worse remains to be seen.

that future VR technology will "provide a form of intentional,
waking-state, shared dreams."
50

A book and online project about multimedia and virtual reality sponsored
by ArtMuseum.net goes even further:

Interactive multimedia is experiential and sensory, you don't
simply observe the object, you are the object. You enter into and become
part of the landscape, not just a detached observer. The medium
functions as an extension of the self, a reconfiguration of identity,
dreams, and memories—blurring the boundaries between self and
exterior. . . . The revolutionary nature of multimedia . . . lies in its
potential to transform the human spirit.
51

User Contributions:

this is a very interesting article and i would very much like to know where you referenced some of it. i am doing a thesis on online gameing and social networking and would be very gratefull if you could send on some links to the articles you described above as they could prove very helpfull

Its difficult to imagine a digital future where quantum computers are abound with the intelligence millions of times more than our own. A future where people are able to mind upload and end up anywhere in the cosmos, it just boggles the mind. What will it mean to live in such a way. What are the social implications, will people stay in touch more, or float endlessly in the vacuum of space for millenia while they contemplate and muse for hundreds of years about existence. What a freaky future we have ahead of us.

Thank you, Science Clarified, for the comprehensive and thought-provoking article. I've been poking around the Web for articles, discussions and references to any respected writings on the potential social, cultural, economic and evolutionary effects of virtual reality as it approaches a degree of verisimilitude that would place it somewhere in the ballpark of a a viable alternative to physical reality.
It doesn't seem possible that virtual reality could actually reach that goal, at least not while human consciousness remains rooted in our individual, physical bodies. And while I agree with Jacob that a virtual world does not have to be devoid of meaning, it would seem that certain representations of physical reality and expressions of physical behavior would, by definition, be doomed to near-meaninglessness in a virtual reality. A virtual meal consumed in a virtual restaurant would not be, and could not ever be, a real source of nutrition. Therefore, it seems unlikely that the concept of dining on virtual cuisine could ever attain a level of meaning beyond that of play-acting. By the same token, a virtual forest fire could not possibly attain the significance or meaning of a real forest fire, because a real fire forever will possess a capacity for physical destruction and loss of life that a virtual fire never will possess. It seems unlikely that the concept of a virtual forest fire ever could attain a level of meaning beyond the symbolic or representational.
The more I think it through, the more inevitable it seems that that any virtual reality -- even a perfect facsimile of the physical one -- could not ever reach an even plane with physical reality. Suppose technology advances to the point where human consciousness is able to escape from its corporeal shell and move into, say, a network of solid-state components. Consider how vulnerable we would be. Virtual hazards certainly would become much more meaningful (hacker-assassins, anyone?), but physical hazards would become absolutely terrifying meta-hazards, taking on a sort of cosmic or godlike power. Redundancy notwithstanding, all you'd need to wipe out your enemy's entire population would be a couple of idiots on the the outside with a back hoe and a telco map.

Very interesting. As a regular user of Second Life for my social interaction with others as well as enjoying building 3D objects, flying, sailing etc etc, I had wondered what is in the future for VR and it's impact on real life in the physical world.
We humans use and abuse. Like anything we have at hand, be it a computer, the internet and virtual reality, we need to maintain a balance. We are physical living beings in a physical world, we need to live in it, breathe the air, interact face to face with family and friends,if we have the ability to do so.
I have a job in real life and it keeps me in touch with reality. But, I live on my own for the time being and I really enjoy the fantasy of Second Life doing all those things, stimulating my mind as if it were real, which I would never do in real life. I meet a lot of people online some who I believe are home bound with an illness. For many, Second Life is a mask converting an introvert into an extrovert. They are sitting behind a screen, laughing, smiling, being creative, sharing with others. Some are in love, some turn to heart breaks and tears.
Many have responsibilities, chores to do such as events coordinator for clubs, musical concerts, manage an airport or being a security officer since behavior needs to be monitored.
For them it is very important to have this ability. And we who are not afflicted and can kick the ball with our kids in Real Life, do so. And sometimes it doesn't go right for us either. We also have lots of things go wrong with real life.

You win or lose by the way you choose.

Interactive social worlds with avatars that are friendly, sensible and creative are not a current issue in my opinion, but the violent gamer's are a worry. The real monsters behind this industry are the big buck collectors.